Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> The informed public – wealthier, more educated, and frequent consumers of news – remain far more trusting of every institution than the mass population.

Is “informed public” an accepted term of art in social science research? Because if not, that seems like an incredibly (and gratuitously) biased label.



The funniest thing to me is this mid-wit notion of thinking you are 'informed' by reading news sites and getting a degree from a 21st century university.


Yes, far more informed than reading Dinesh D’Souza Facebook posts or natural wellness Instagram stories.


Politics is preference. If you don’t read any D’Souza, you might not know what half the country thinks?


Is that the only other alternative?


Yes, unless you’re going to say Joe Rogan who I fit under natural wellness.


It seems to be a misnomer given by the (academic) elites.

It’s problematic to label your followers as fools.


"Methodology: We first divided the population of respondents into two groups: 'Informed Public' and 'Knuckle Dragging Fuckwits'. We then compared..."


Looking at the state of academia, its an honor to have those people think I'm a 'Knuckle Dragging Fuckwit'


This is a social class that still hasn’t quite realized the bubble they’re in.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: